Al-Mubin: Islamic Scientific Journal

The publication of articles in CONS-IEDU: Journal of Islamic Guidance and Counseling is an important foundation in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. This article supports and embodies the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree on expected standards of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the public, as for publishing actions refer to COPE as a best practice guideline for journal editors.

Author assignment

1. Reporting Standards: The author must present an accurate report of the research conducted as well as important matters from the results of an objective discussion. Researchers must present their research results honestly and without imitation, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A scientific work manuscript must contain sufficiently detailed information and bibliography so as to provide space for other researchers to continue their research. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate reporting is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow the provisions of the journal submission guidelines.
2. Authenticity and Plagiarism: Writers must ensure that all of their writing is completely original. Authors cannot submit one manuscript to more than one published journal simultaneously unless it has been approved by the editors. Previous writings and publications of the same kind, either by other researchers or by the author himself, can be acknowledged and used as a reference. If any major literature is used, it should be written in quotation marks. If there is a statement taken directly from the publication of other researchers, it should be marked with the word quote.
3. Excessive publication at the same time: In general, the author may not submit the same manuscript in more than one journal published at the same time. This is intended to avoid unethical and unacceptable behavior. 
4. Various publications: Various publications born from personal research must really be identified and the results of their publications can be used as references.
5. Acknowledgment of Sources used: The author must acknowledge all data sources used in the research and the results of publication excerpts that have influenced in determining the nature of the research. We should always give proper credit to the research results of others.
6. Ownership: Ownership of published research must be able to show the contribution of each individual in scientific writing and reports accurately. This ownership is limited to researchers who make significant contributions, especially in the concepts, designs, interpretations of the studies presented. As for other researchers who are equally contributing should be written as the second author, third, and so on. If the most contributors are written as the first author, then the other contributors are written in the acknowledgment section. Authors must ensure that all contributors have seen and agreed to the results of their written work to be published and their involvement as second, third, and so on authors.
7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must disclose their manuscripts, both those related to finance and conflicts of interest, which may have limited influence on the interpretation day of their written works. All sources of finance/funds supporting all projects should be disclosed.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Urnals: If the author finds fundamental errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, then the author must pay attention to suggestions and input from the editor of the journal or publisher and work closely with the editor to improve his writing.

Editor's Duties

1. Publishing Decision: Based on the review results of the editorial board's report, editors can accept, reject, or request changes to scientific paper manuscripts. The validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive those decisions. Editors can be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by legal provisions such as applicable defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism laws. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the writing they publish.
2. Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for authenticity. Editors must arrange and use peer review which has a qualified and wise capacity. In addition, he must also explain his peer review process in conveying information to the author and also indicate which part of the journal is being reviewed. Editors must also use the right peer reviewer for papers that are worthy of publication by selecting people who have sufficient competence and avoiding conflicts of interest.
3. Principle of Fairness: The editor must ensure that every manuscript received by the editorial board of the journal is reviewed for intellectual content issues regardless of the author's gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. An important part of their responsibility is making fair decisions and upholding the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position with making publishing decisions, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and objective as possible.
4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that the information regarding the manuscript submitted by the author is kept confidential. Editors must critically assess any potential violations of data protection and author confidentiality, including using appropriate information related to the current research presented, and research that is applicable and worthy of publication.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished material for disclosure in manuscripts submitted for independent research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about which articles have a conflict of interest.

Reviewers

1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as confidential information. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editors.
2. Recognized Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in their writing. He must also identify related scientific papers that were published and not cited by the author. Some statements that previously reported observations, derivations, or opinions should be accompanied by relevant quotations. Reviewers must notify the editorial board of the journal as soon as possible if they make deviations, such as aspects of work ethics, know that there are substantial similarities between the manuscripts they are reviewing and manuscripts submitted to other journals or articles published, or suspect that this may occur either during research or writing and submission of manuscripts; The reviewer, however, must maintain the author's confidentiality and not investigate further unless the journal's editorial board requests further information or advice.
3. Standards of Objectivity: Reviews of submitted manuscripts must be carried out objectively and reviewers must express their views with clear and supportive arguments. He or she should also follow the journal's directions regarding the specific feedback required by the author, unless there is a reasonable reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the author to improve the quality of the author's manuscript, provide suggestions and input that can support statements written in the manuscript with the consideration that this can improve the quality of the author's writing.
4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author, notify the journal if this knowledge raises a potential conflict of interest.
5. Confidential information or ideas: Information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider any manuscript to have a conflict of interest that would create a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship or connection with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the work. If there are two views that are confused, the reviewer can suspect the identity of the author by notifying the editorial board that this article has the potential to cause a conflict of interest.
6. Accuracy: The reviewer must provide a response within the agreed time frame. S/hes only agree to review/review manuscripts if they are reasonably sure they can deliver the results of their review within a mutually agreed upon time, informing the journal as soon as possible if they require additional time. If he finds it impossible to complete his manuscript review within the allotted time, this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to other reviewers.